Skip to main content

Full text of "Liminal No. 2"

See other formats

Number 2 January 2012 



« For the wildness at the pulse of this world » 


An update to Errico Malatesta's "Strategy" 

We must prepare for the disruptions to the For my part, I believe both attitudes have their 

western way of (pseudo)life which will inevitably advantages and disadvantages. In fact, in many 

come to this world. How can we achieve our anarchists these two convictions complement 

anarchistic aspirations with prevailing global one another. Adjusting our conduct to the 

powers? How can we connect our thought to its demands of the ideal goal and the needs of the 

effective application? situation brings about great practical 

Because we do not necessarily recognise the effectiveness, while retaining the goal of true 

authority of persons or texts and we base ourselves liberty and justice. To neglect all the problems 

on free criticism, many of us spend our time of reconstruction or to prearrange complete 

refining ideals without paying much mind to and uniform plans are both errors which, by 

whether they are being communicated, different routes, would lead to our defeat as 

understood or accomplished. It is difficult to tell a anarchists and to the victory of authoritarian 

person that they are to chose their own path, free regimes. 

of the State, free of oppressors, and free of It is absurd to believe that once the state has 

relations based on commodity, when these are the been destroyed and capitalists have been 

things they are synchronized with. Our ideal will dispelled things will look after themselves 

not take hold within the current state. Some of us, without the intervention of those who already 

according to this realization, have dedicated and have an idea of what has to be done and who 

restricted ourselves to the destruction of present immediately set about doing it. Perhaps this 

institutions of oppression and simultaneously could happen — and indeed it would be better 

forget about the issue of creating new and if it were so — if there was time to wait for 

recreating old social relations for our lives after the people, for everyone, to find a way of satisfying 

destruction of the state. their own needs and tastes in agreement with 

These anarchists seem to believe that the the needs and tastes of others. But social life 

problems of reconstruction will not require does not permit interruption. In the immediate 

preparation and planning now, as though all aftermath of the revolution, indeed on the very 

people will become thoughtful and respectful if same day of the insurrection, food and other 

state violence and capitalist privilege were urgent needs must be supplied to the 

eliminated; as though conflicts of interest would population. Therefore to ensure the continued 

vanish; and that prosperity, peace and harmony production of the basics, the replacement of the 

would proliferate in the world. main public services and needs in urban areas 

Others, motivated above all by the desire to be - (food, water, transport, etc.) in perhaps new 

or to appear to be - practical are concerned with ways, and the uninterrupted exchange between 

the perceived difficulties inherent in the aftermath city and countryside if cities are still dependent 

of the revolution and aware of the need to win on them (for food). 

over the greater part of the public, or at least Later the greatest difficulties will disappear, 

overcome their ignorant hostility toward those Labor for food and necessities will no longer be 

lives free of government and capitalism. They wish foreign and the monstrous urban 

to set out a complete plan of social reorganisation conglomerations will melt away. The 

which would respond to all problems and satisfy population will be spread out rationally over 

the needs of the people. the world and every area, every grouping 

We live at a LIMINAL. As a species, 
humans have pushed this world to the 
edge of its habitability. This publication 
questions the intent behind the recent 
actions of these creatures and documents 
the struggle and creative reactions 
against oppressive power relations. We 
seek to create new spaces, restore 
wildness and revisit old ideas in order to 
live freely. In this LIMINAL existence we 
will sabotage and dismantle the Machine 
that threatens all that life is capable of. 
We bring you a selection of thoughts in 
the deceptive and incomplete - yet 
liberating - form of printed language and 
images. This industrial civilization will 
not be tolerated because as a whole, it 
cannot be tolerated. We hope the 
(dis)contents of this journal inspire you 
to get up and break the Machine that is 
breaking the minds and bodies of too 
many creatures, sentient and non- 
sentient alike. 

All rights dispersed 


PO Box 7428 

Minneapolis, MN 55407 

Contact us with contributions of letters, 

narratives, play scripts, poetry, Utopias, 

dystopias, materials for review, native 

seeds for guerrilla gardening, 

ammunition, drawings, photos, 

plagiarized materials, et cetera. Send 

what you can for copies of following 


in the early morning 

the ship, the airy city 

that crosses times 

trembles, bells or screams, 

bundles of grassconcretegrass, infinity 

another form of my self asks 

i was the strange one 
did you think, the needs of ice; 

what end of it you are on ? 

who came close to knowing you 

as an archer, pulling back an arrow 


to cut the untidal strings 

ones tensioned by the moon 

dangling when everyone drops like 


fluffed and dead 

a spec of light rests on my hand 

and carrying it to the imaginary house 

setting it somewhere within 

you pick it up and 

using a spear with a coral dagger 

carved with the infallible signs 

do the same to the moon 

cutting thru infinity 

your blood and mine become one 

(while conserving and adding to the natural world 
they occupy and yet remain linked to human 
society as a whole through a sense of sympathy 
and solidarity), will in general be self-sufficient and 
not afflicted by the oppressive and costly 
complications of economic life now. 

But these and a thousand other beautiful things 
which come to mind are the concern of the future, 
while we, here and now, need to think how to live 
in today's world, in the situation that history has 
handed to us and which revolution, an act of 
violence, cannot radically change overnight by 
waving a magic wand. And since, for better or 
worse, we need to live, if we do not know how and 
cannot do what needs to be done, others with 
different aims will do it instead, with results quite 
contrary to those we are striving for. 

We must not neglect the common person, who 
after all represents the majority of the population 
and without whose involvement emancipation is 
out of the question; we can only be as free as our 
neighbor, but there is no need to rely too heavily 
on their thought and initiative for such subversive 

The ordinary person has many excellent qualities; 
they have immense potential, which gives the 
certain hope that they will one day become the 
humanity upon which we have set our sights. But 
meanwhile they have one serious defect, which 
largely explains the emergence and persistence of 
tyranny: they do not like to think. And even when 
they make attempts at emancipation they are 
always more inclined to follow those who spare 
them the effort of thinking critically and who take 
over their responsibility for organising, directing 
and commanding. So long as their habits are not 
overly disrupted they are satisfied if others do the 
thinking and tell them what to do, even if they are 
left with nothing but the obligation to work and 

This weakness, this tendency of the herd to wait 
for and follow orders has been the bane of many a 
revolution and remains the danger for the 
revolutions in the near future. 

If the crowd does not look to itself, right away, 
people of good will, capable of initiative and 
decision-making, must necessarily do things for 
them. And it is in this, in the means of providing 
for the urgent necessities, that we must clearly be 
distinguishable from the authoritarian parties. 

The authoritarians intend to sort the question by 
setting themselves up in government and imposing 

their program by force. They may even be in 
good faith and believe sincerely that they do the 
good of all, but in fact they would succeed only 
in creating a new privileged class concerned 
with maintaining the new government and, in 
effect, substituting one tyranny for another. 

Certainly anarchists must strive to make the 
transition from the state of servitude to one of 
freedom as unlaborious as possible, providing 
the public with as many practical and 
immediately applicable ideas as possible; but 
anarchists must beware of encouraging that 
intellectual inertia, stagnancy and above 
lamented tendency of obeying and leaving it to 
others to act. 

To truly succeed as an emancipating force, for 
the free initiative of all and everyone, the 
revolution must develop freely in a thousand 
different ways, corresponding to the thousand 
different moral and material conditions in 
which the people now find themselves. And we 
must put forward and carry out as far as we can 
those ways of life that best correspond to our 
ideals. But above all we must make a special 
effort to awaken in the mass of the people a 
spirit of initiative and the habit of doing things 
for themselves. 

We must also avoid appearing to be in 
command. We can do this by acting through 
words and deeds as comrades among 
comrades. We must remind ourselves that if we 
are too zealous in forcing the pace in our 
direction to implement our plans, we run the 
risk of clipping the wings of the revolution and 
of ourselves assuming, more or less unwittingly, 
that function of government that we deplore so 
much in others. And as a government we would 
not be worth any more than the others. Perhaps 
we might even be more dangerous to freedom, 
because, so strongly convinced as we are of 
being free and full of care, we could tend, like 
real fanatics, to hold all who do not think or act 
like us to be counter-revolutionaries and 
enemies of the common good. 

If what the others do is not what we would 
want, it does not matter - so long as the liberty 
of all creatures, within or without a society, is 
safeguarded. What matters is that the people do 
what they want while transforming the way 
they are dependent on the state in preparation 
for a revolution. The only assured conquests are 
what the people do with their own efforts. 




The monument is a monument of its own 
oblivion. It receives meaning only when there is 
someone who can give it meaning. It is the stone 
you hold in your hand. If you have never 
submitted. Only the river always shows the 
correct time. When the stone is reflected, it is not 
of vanity. Reflection reveals everything, not 
stone. Stones and rivers are what you'd like to 

EXHIBITION IV (panoramic) 

I moved my eyes towards the hills in the 
northeast, where the new suburbs dominated, 
then to how their New Year fireworks in the 
distance looked like a brew of microorganisms, 
swimming, floating, with hair, tails and rising or 
constantly flickering, a living mass in which 
some individuals died and others were 
beginning, the steady pace, so the overall 
brightness is kept constant, or almost, for a while 
(maybe ten or fifteen minutes), before it all dried 
up and crumbled, and only the first blue-black 
sky remained with the same serene stars as 


This leaf wrapped itself about my arm 

as a tag or a plea? 

I was accepted to the natural gang 

Begged by them 

We have the power in our own lives 

to resist the lives oppressors wish we had 

we are all proponents of myth 

make the myths serve not their ends 

not our ends, but the end of the present 'us' 


The directresses, somnambulent men in truth, 
direful from the laughs of a few people who 
come, flew, a version of coming. Clinging sex like 
the end of the now hung first sorrow and 
championed the coming of para-piping in the 
stations. Watching buckles grow in seats and get 

out young, ribboning language out the 
plexigraphed mouthhole and animals like a kind 
having dead drinks and old lies to dog grossly 
inward about forest floors. But a few strings and 
the rail moves forward, back never, the beach 
crumbling in the noose while bees run over a few 
times in the hall behind the stages of stacked 



(efil/dezilivic/eht/gnivael( ?)s 'namuhlalfoK ?)yrots/a) 
From the steady autumn, despite the sinister 
howls, he raked through the ravine as a 
caterpillar not growing. After a desperate claim 
he began the shooting game. Though it was 
much more than one should carry, he takes all 
the blame. In his violent travels, there's no time 
for silly talk where you're set to stalk and stalk 
that one moment of glory (likely in a pub). Then 
you miss the train and the crawling lanes require 
you to shed your chains - though this is a lot 
more than I can handle. 


Wish I would smile in sunny days in the light 
breeze; could lead me further. Someone would 
call from beyond the maze of winter freeze and 
draw me to their grey eyes seeing behind the 
stage of dull stars and bleeding sunlight. Wish I 
could stave silence away - the silent parts of all 
that's left undone. Nights filled of snow and 
velvet prayers and all you long for is light on the 
stage, a ball without a chain, sweetheart's death 
might make you stronger. Gaze with calm eyes to 
crystal all the lies the trembling ground - what 
have you done? I wish I could wake as the walls 
start to quake from the impossible sound of her 
heart leaves the sun. The summer breeze begone 
and there, the leaves, that bleeding sun. 


Do I recall you as a dusty treed night? (have you 
ever wavered, or always have you both these 
qualities: a trepid stack of hay fell - freed and 

pagan, our ardor has only = only matched by a 
genuine opposite: a gushing river -as passionless 
and fastmoving as the auto which drives the 
person who drove the land which drives the sky 
(an exploration of finer curves) finding it has 
none but the sad ones where it started and 
committed to memory healing zephyrs. The kind 
that kill: falling hay falling snow, falling rock, 
falling hands, even, for they recall best the lined 
memory, hands are staring aches and loving the 
firebreak which brought us to parallels) I believe 
I recall dusty treed nights alone. 


You take an object, perhaps. Any object will do - 
a sink. You've taken a sink. There may be several 
about this habitat, kitchen, bathroom, bathroom. 
The materials? Marble glass mountains. The kind 
you roll into another, collide, pushing others out 
of the halo you've drawn. Sinks break. You've 
seen one break. Was it worth flinging about you 
seem to ask yourself in the next installation of 
thumbings. How many sinks are there - you 
could flick your thumb a million times before 
you question the workings, the tendons that 
seem to snap elastically But any object will do. It 
makes one think, how trivial an object, a world of 
dead objects. You calm yourself enough to ask if 
it is over - it isn't, but how? 


(Said in or with an accent redolent of the north 
american southern regions (20 th century), set at 
the beaten and deformed steel parallel beams 
called railroad tracks (the kind large machines 
that ran on a juice that came from the beneath the 
planets surface whose extraction and overuse has 
caused a great damage to many forms of life 
would travel along, carrying many oddities) a 
person with slicked white hair we cannot see 
under an old black cap. They are naked. Their 
sex is indistinguishable because we (who are 
we?) have chosen not to distinguish it. They are 
politically unattached we've learned (again, 
how?)): Oh, my labour - when divided - consists 
entirely of the fist clenching itself and the hammer, 

resting or burying itself back in to the sludge earth I 
have ruined in the undividedness. Division of labour? 
Yes, if it were capable of being divided, I would divide 
it to nothingness. (They bat at the air with their 
hands, fists pushing air molecules, years away a child 
trips nearby the dissintegratede tracks) Though, I 
cannot. I am against such division, I suppose (They 
pick up the long hammer and begin to sting 
uniformly at one of the steel tracks, deforming it) 
Almost like the kind of travel they thought impossible, 
bringing to points together that warn't joined since 
the plasmahot they wah born in. From (swings 
hammer) the blood (swings) of the (swings) giant... 
(swings). We've made more assumptions about the 
other than we were permitted before the fall... now I 
express myself in the ruins of a past I do not entirely 

we are in a unique place 

we could destroy ourselves 

nuclear war, environmental destruction 

the latter, an imperative; it's part of the system. 

it's required of those who live in capitalism, 

in modern industrial western society, 

to compromise the environment 

if we keep the current system 

we are doomed 

state capitalist institutions must fall 

there is no other way 

you must find your own to fight 

you must find a way to contribute to a larger 

struggle as well 

stop voting 

stop using banks 

stop using currency 

stop paying (taxes, etc.) 

do it yourself 

expand the floor of the cage and then break out 

create the basis for going beyond the cage 

find land with a group and grow food 

you will not survive without food, water 

you will not survive under divisive labor 

feed yourself and feed your creativity 

feed your neighbors 

create real anarchist movements 



(Originally from issue no. 43 of A:aJoDA, Letters section. Appears here 

edited, while retaining the message of the original by Laure Akai, an 

unrepentant revolutionist from Moscow, Russia) 

It would seem a number of persons in the anarchist 
milieu are, in some form, opposed to violence. If the 
individual is not totally opposed to violence, then they 
may be opposed to anything but collectively engaged 
violence such as mass insurrection); the individual's 
decision to engage in such acts without the expressed 
permission of an organized body is a horror to many. Even 
the individual's choice of words may be called into 
question as the anarchist is trapped by the bourgeois 
media's games of attributing a single ideology to the 
anarchist movement; there are individuals and 
organizations that then try to redefine the ideology in their 
own image, convinced that that if there are no monolithic 
positions, then the movement itself is impotent. This 
seeming attempt to define anarchy and anarchism as a 
pacifist movement is deplorable. 

An honest examination of the tactics of fawning to 
conservatives is long overdue. (By conservatives I mean all 
people who would conserve a system of wage labor, 
political representation, policing and other anti- 
immediatist forces.) So many of these liberal anarchists 
don't want to alienate the media (one of the most alienating 
and most disgusting of all institutions of power) because 
they seem to believe that if they could just get their 
message of peace and Utopia out to the masses, people 
would understand the high moral desirability of anarchism 
and only at that point, when people can consciously 
consent to making changes in society, can we embark on 
mass social change without violence and bloodshed. As a 
person who formerly held these opinions, I can understand 
where this point of view is coming from and the need to 
separate oneself, morally, from the agents of terror and 
policing who rule the earth. The imperative to act morally, 
however, has always been a part of the arsenal of the ruling 
classes (who generally define morality to begin with). 
When these morals infringe on others' rights to live, better 
to get rid of them than to live with them forever. 
Furthermore, in many people the decision to act morally, 
or, in this situation, to publicly adopt some morality, has 
more to do with a need to be recognized by others as a 
paragon of virtue than to affect any real change via 
examples of human behavior. This strategy of appealing to 
conservative elements of society cannot be very effective in 
the future for the following reasons: 

1) technology has the capability to affect human 
behavior and alter the way we socialize with remarkable 
speed; the technological program can outpace and will 
always be two steps ahead of the anarchist moral program; 

2) such moralistic issues such as equality can be 
easily recuperated by the ruling classes whose ability to 

muster public support is far greater than ours because they 
are intentionally deceptive; 

3) people can be morally opposed to a regime but 
feel powerless to overthrow it, which gives any regime a 
free hand to implement unpopular policies which 
effectively negate the desires of the people; 

4). the fact that anarchists don't make rebellions 
more often actually works to their disadvantage; when 
people have to look back into history to see the last 
rebellions, it makes anarchism look like a thing of the past. 
Despite what the pacifists feel, many people respect action 
more than perfectionism. By appealing to the more 
conservative elements, they may be discouraging some of 
the more radical ones. 

Another thing that the moralists seem to ignore is that 
mass segments of society are dying to see some action and 
real radical change. Go stand on a street in many New York 
neighborhoods with a sign that says "Kill the police" and 
you'll get a much warmer response than standing there 
with a sign that says "No more killing - form a commune." 
These liberal anarchists would think that the second sign 
represents a far more productive alternative for people and 
it's just that the people don't understand it yet because they 
haven't been educated with the proper ideas. But perhaps 
it is the over-educated of these types that alienate them 
from the overwhelming misery of most people on the 
earth. The current oppressive system can be full of 
interesting potential for the liberal anarchist; what a nasty 
interruption a social revolution would be. Many people, 
however, are more convinced that they could do with some 
revolution right now and are not that concerned with 
details like who is going to clean the compost toilets; these 
people are far more ready to rock and roll than the liberal 
anarchist and for obvious reasons. They have no interest in 
the system at all; the anarcho-liberal is more at home in the 
system and can be more effective at coping with its 

While I agree that the problems of modern society are 
too big to be assigned to one living symbol, this is a more 
effective way for one living individual to attack the 
minions of authority than say, blowing up the pentagon, 
which would undoubtedly require an extraordinary 
organized effort and would be a thousand times more 
likely to lead to capture. Attacks on the right individuals 
can be highly resonant; such acts can create terror in the 
ranks of authority. It is important to frighten people, if only 
to make them understand that they cannot act with 

The problem with terror campaigns, as anybody can 
understand, is the high probability that they can cause a 
public reaction where, out of fear, people would rally to 
defend people and institutions that they normally could 
not care less about or even dislike. On the other hand, each 
successful act of resistance (be it terrorist campaign or 
pacifist protest) sends the message out to others that they 

«p» (» 3 «c» 

a © ® gg; <§ 
& s 3 f | nl « 

& a* S S P-'a ^ 

can take action. My bet is that there are thousands ready to 
pick up the a gun, a monkey wrench or a wooden shoe; 
they may just be waiting for others to start up the action. 
(Anybody who has ever been in a semi-riot has probably 
seen crowds of people waiting eagerly to shoplift - waiting 

for the first person to smash a store window.) It may be 
argued that periods of social unrest simply lead to ones of 
reaction, but remember how much fun we all have 
recalling the unrest. 

Fuck capitalism, fuck civilization! &* 


Tall dark trunk, relatively few and spreading horizontal limbs, delicate spraylike foliage. Widespread, 

familiar, cone-bearing, evergreen trees with clusters of long, slender needles along the twigs. Nee 

clusters bound at base into bundles; each bundle with 5 needles (2"-4" long). Male cones (catkins) 

small, pollen-producing; female cones larger, woody, seed-bearing. Cones slender; tapering and 

thornless. Height 80' - 100', diameter 2'-3'. (dwarf varieties in windswept northern areas). 

White pines have been so extensively lumbered that few virgin trees, which once grew to heights of 

200'-220', remain. Wood is light, soft, straight-grained and generally not as resinous as other pines. 

All pines edible. Found dry to moist soil. One or more species throughout. 

Use: Candy, cooked vegetable, flour, tea. The tender new shoots, stripped of their needles and peeled, 

can be made into an acceptable candy when boiled until tender and then simmered in a maple syrup 

or similar (20-30 min.) In emergencies the firm young male cones can be boiled and the inner bark can 

be made into flour (dry and grind into meal and mixed with other flours); piny flavored but highly 

nutritious. Chopped fine and steeped in hot water, the fresh needles make an aromatic tea rich in 

vitamins A and C. The light green needles from the spring shoots make the best tea, but other needles 

can be used as well. SPRING (shoots, inner bark, male cones) ALL YEAR (needles). 

(WHITE PINE shown below) 


Spruces are steeple-shaped trees of cold climates with short, stiff, sharp-pointed somewhat 4-sided 

needles that grow all around the twigs. Twigs rough when needles removed. Spruce cones are brown, 

woody and drooping. Unlike firs, mature spruce cones are not erect and do not fall apart on the tree. 

Their scales are thin, not heavy or thorny as in the pines. Bark is rough and dark. 

Spruces grow north to the limit of trees, forests thinning down to dwarf specimens extending far into 

the tundra. One species persists on mountaintops as far south as Georgia. 

Use: Cooked vegetable, flour, chewing gum. In emergencies, the tender leading shoots can be 

stripped of their needles and boiled, and the inner bark can be used like that of balsam fir (164). The 

condensed and hardened sap, or pitch, is a familiar northwoods substitute for chewing gum. 
Spruce beer is made from the fermented leaves and twigs of Red or Black spruces after being boiled 

with molasses or honey or other sugars. 
SPRING (shoots, inner bark) ALL YEAR (pitch) 




Let us start by apologizing; that our words may be 
incoherent, our thoughts scattered and our tone overly 
emotional. Forgive us, because the ringing in our ear 
continues to interrupt our thinking, because our eyes 
are bleary and we're weighed upon by the anxiety and 
trauma of our injuries and the imprisonment of the ones 
we love. As most of you are well-aware: after a full day 
and night of street battles in Oakland, we were defeated 
in our efforts to occupy a large building for the purposes 
of establishing an social center. We're writing, in part, 
to correct the inaccuracies and mystifications spewed by 
the scum Media. But more so as to convey the intensity 
and the urgency of the situation in Oakland to comrades 
abroad. To an extent, this is an impossible task. Video 
footage and mere words must inevitably fail at 
conveying the ineffable collective experiences of the past 
twenty-four hours. But as always, here goes. 
Yesterday was one of the most intense days of our lives. 
We say this without hyperbole or bravado. The terror in 
the streets of Miami or St. Paul, the power in the streets 
of Pittsburgh or Oakland's autumn; yesterday's affect 
met or superseded each of these. The events of yesterday 
confronted us as a series of intensely beautiful and yet 
terrible moments. 

An abbreviated sequence 
Beautiful words are delivered at Oscar Grant Plaza, 
urging us to cultivate our hatred for capitalism. 
Hundreds leave the plaza and quickly become 
thousands. The police attempt to seize the sound 
truck, but it is rescued by the swarming crowd. We 
turn towards our destination and are blocked. We 
turn another way and are blocked once more. We 
flood through the Laney campus and emerge to 
find that we've been headed off again. We make the 
next logical move and somehow the police don't 
anticipate it. We're closer to the building, now 
surrounded by fences and armed swine. We tear at 
the fences, downing them in some spots. The police 
begin their first barrage of gas and smoke. The 
initial fright passes. Calmly, we approach from 
another angle. 

The pigs set their line on Oak. To our left, the 
museum; to our right, an apartment complex. 
Shields and reinforced barricades to the front; we 
push forwards. They launch flash bangs and bean 
bags and gas. We respond with rocks and flares 

and bottles. The shields move forward. Another 
volley from the swine. The shields deflect most of 
the projectiles. We crouch, wait, then push forward 
all together. They come at us again and again. We 
hurl their shit, our shit, and whatever we can find 
back at them. Some of us are hit by rubber bullets, 
others are burned by flashbang grenades. We see 
cops fall under the weight of perfectly-arced stones 
For what feels like an eternity, we exchange throws 
and shield one another. Nothing has felt like this 
before. Lovely souls in the apartment building 
hand pitchers of waters from their windows to 
cleanse our eyes. We'll take a moment here to 
express our gratitude for the unprecedented 
bravery and finesse with which the shield-carrying 
strangers carried out their task. We retreat to the 
plaza, carrying and being carried by one another. 

We re-group, scheme, and a thousand deep, set 
out an hour later. Failing to get into our second 
option, we march onwards towards a third. The 
police spring their trap: attempting to kettle us in 
the park alongside the 19th and Broadway lot that 
we'd previously occupied. Terror sets in; the've 
reinforced each of their lines. They start gassing 
again. More projectiles, our push is repelled. The 
intelligence of the crowd advances quickly. Tendrils 
of the crowd go after the fences. In an inversion of 
the moment where we first occupied this lot, the 
fences are downed to provide an escape route. We 
won't try to explain the joy of a thousand wild-ones 
running full speed across the lot, downing the 
second line of fencing and spilling out into the 
freedom of the street. More of the cat and mouse. 
In front of the YMCA, they spring another kettle. 
This time they're deeper and we have no flimsy 
fencing to push through. Their lines are deep. A 
few dozen act quickly to climb a nearby gate, 
jumping dangerously to the hard pavement below. 
Past the gate, the cluster of escapees find a row of 
several unguarded OPD vans: you can imagine 
what happened next. A complicit YMCA employee 
throws opens the door. Countless escape into the 
building and out the exits. The police become 
aware of both escape routes and begin attacking 
and trampling those who try but fail to get out. 
Those remaining in the kettle are further brutalized 
and resign to their arrest. 

A few hundred keep going. Vengeance time. 

People break into city hall. Everything that can be 
trashed is trashed. Files thrown everywhere, 
computers get it too, windows smashed out. The 
american flags are brought outside and 
ceremoniously set to fire. A march to the jail, lots of 
graffiti, a news van gets wrecked, jail gates 
damaged. The pigs respond with fury. Wantonly 
beating, pushing, shooting whomever crosses their 
path. Many who escaped earlier kettles are had by 
snatch squads. Downtown reveals itself to be a 
fucking warzone. Those who are still flee to empty 
houses and loving arms. 

A war-machine must intrinsically be also a 
machine of care. As we write, hundreds of our 
comrades remain behind bars. Countless others are 
wounded and traumatized. We've spent the last 
night literally stitching one another together and 
assuring each other that things will be okay. We 
still can't find a lot of people in the system, rumors 
abound, some have been released, others held on 
serious charges and have bail set. This care- 
machine is as much of what we name the Oakland 
Commune as the encampment or the street 
fighting. We still can't count the comrades we can't 
find on all our hands combined. 

We move through the sunny morning and the 
illusion of social peace has descended back upon 
Oakland. And yet everywhere is the evidence of 
what transpired. City workers struggle to fix their 
pathetic fences. Boards are affixed to the windows 
of city hall and to nearby banks (some to hide 
damage, others simply to hide behind). Power 
washer try to clear away the charred remains of the 
stupid flag. One literally cannot look anywhere 
along broadway without seeing graffiti defaming 
the police or hyping our teams (anarchy, nortes, the 
commune, even juggalos). A discerning eye can still 
find the remnants of teargas canisters and 
flashbang residue. At the coffeeshops and delis, 
friends and acquaintances find one another and 
share updates about who has been hurt and who 
has been had. Our wounds already begin to heal 
into what will eventually be scars or ridiculous 
disfigurements. We hope our lovers will forgive 
such ugliness, or can come to look at them as little 
instances of unique beauty. As our adrenaline fades 

and we each find moments of solitude, we are each 
hit by the gravity of the situation. 

Having failed to take a building, our search 
continues. We continue to find the perfect 
combination of trust, planning, intensity and action 
that can make our struggle into a permanent 
presence. The commune has and will continue to 
slip out of time, interrupting the deadliness and 
horror of the day to day function of society. 
Threads of the commune continue uninterrupted as 
the relationships and affinity build over the past 
months. An insurrectionary process is the one that 
emboldens these relationships and multiplies the 
frequency with which the commune emerges to 
interrupt the empty forward-thrust of capitalist 
history. To push this process forward, our task is to 
continue the ceaseless experimentation and 
imagination which could illuminate different 
strategies and pathways beyond the current limits 
of the struggle. Sometimes to forget, sometimes to 

We'll conclude with a plea to our friends 
throughout the country and across borders. You 
must absolutely not view the events here as a 
sequence that is separate from your own life. 
Between the beautiful and spectacular moments in 
the Bay, you'll discover the same alienation and 
exploitation that characterizes your own situation. 
Please do not consume the images from the Bay as 
you would the images of overseas rioting or as a 
netflix subscription. Our hell is yours, and so too is 
our struggle. 

And so please... if you love us as we believe you 
do, prove it. We wish so desperately that you were 
with us in body, but we know most of you cannot 
be. Spread the commune to your own locales. Ten 
cities have already announced their intentions to 
hold solidarity demonstrations tonight. Join them, 
call for your own. If you aren't plugged into 
enough of a social force to do so, then find your 
own ways of demonstrating. With your friends or 
even alone: smash, attack, expropriate, blockade 
occupy. Do anything in your power to spread the 
prevalence and the perversity of our interruption, 
for a prolonged conflict; for a permanent presence; 
for the commune, -some friends in Oakland 


Who will revive the violent whirlpools of flame if not us ideology, and as a separated organ, representing 
and those that we consider brothers? a class. We are for the autonomous self- 
Come/ New friends: this will please you. organization of the exploited. History has shown 
We will never work, oh tides of flame! through two clear examples that the traditional 
This world will explode. form of the party (Russian revolution) and union 
It's the true path. Forward, on the march. (Spanish revolution) were nothing more than two 

—A. Rimbaud attempts to manage capitalism and not to 

The spread of sabotage, its increasing practice, overcome it, and this is something that, 

on a greater or lesser scale, far and wide against consciously or unconsciously, everybody knows, 

the domination of the Machine is a given fact. In the seizure of power, it is not destroyed, but 

Burning ATMs, disabling locks at shopping exercised: in the first case, the class of 

centers, smashing shop windows, burning police bureaucrats replaced the bourgeoisie, and in the 

vehicles and setting fire to the offices of temp other case, the anarcho-syndicalist leaders 

agencies and employment offices, the sabotage of participated in bourgeois power, calling for the 

the infrastructure of capitalism - the integrated self-management of every aspect of their lives 

spectacle. All this is put into practice by and not just work. To be precise, both forms have 

individuals bored with survival as commodities the exaltation of leaving aside the qualitative 

(life reduced to economic imperatives and increase of life. This (practical and theoretical) 

disillusioned with false opposition (more false defeat of the tradition organizations, which claim 

and less oppositional with each day that goes to represent us, has not been absorbed by the 

by), parties and unions that want to manage our working class (it seems that we only know how 

misery and integrate us into a mode of to work), and we go along without maintaining 

production that prevents us from any any possibility of control over essential aspects of 

participation in the decisions that relate directly our lives, in a world that is developed, not only 

to us and that assist in enslaving us, mutilating without our participation, but against us. But, 

every gesture of negation of the existent. The comrades, history is not cyclic; it is a cumulative 

spectacle writes the scenario and distributes the process and already weighs too heavily upon out 

roles: worker, professor, student, housewife, weary bodies. 

mother, father, son, daughter, male, female, The contradiction between the possibilities of 

unemployed, police, soldier, artist, humanitarian, the means of production (the use of a few for the 

intellectual.. .the majority, individuals who enjoyment of all, since most of them are useless 

assume different roles in the course of 24 hours, and harmful and would be destroyed) and the 

see their existence as still more terrible, assuming relations of production (waged exploitation, 

this is possible. Everyone with their commodification, the exclusions of class society) 

neurotischizoid viewpoint will react to the has reached an insurmountable point of rupture, 

stimuli launched by power in the way that was In the spectacle it is easier to falsify the nature of 

already expected. All social activity is planned in this contradiction than to increase mercantile 

order to reinforce the spectacle, thus slowing production with increasing use value. This 

down its unstoppable process of decomposition, inertia forces it to display by its own police of 

Though we don't want to hear the shrieking of decomposed thought (pro-situationists, cadres, 

militants in whatever organization, clearly we nongovernmental organizations, recuperators, 

are not against the concept of "organization" as artists, journalists... the clique of politically 

such but against "organization" conceived as an correct alternatives). These toilet brushes of 

end in itself, as the crystallization of any modernity, like good priests, hope that with their 

patches, the proper development of the system 
will lead us, hand in hand, into an ideal world 
planned by their false consciousness and by 
putridity of their armoured brains; as if they had 
ever given us anything. Their social function, 
which has been denounced for decades already, 
has been worth more to them than any 
aggressions, beatings or assassinations, and we 
are sure that these will not be mere anecdotes. 
They deceive and manipulate us. We must not 
allow them ta have a single day more. They are 
the guardians to the keys of our informal chains. 
They amuse us with insignificant debates. They 
impose their opinions on us, avoiding questions 
so simple that they make them tremble with 
terror: How best to live? Who and what keeps us 
from this? Questions that immediately unmask 
the professionals of the lie. Critical coherence 
and the critique of incoherence aid this 

Injustice is not anonymous; it has a name and an 

— Bertold Brecht 

Situationist theory, as integral critique of the 
totality of the conditions of survival and of the 
mercantile-spectacular capitalism that 

necessitates them, has been confirmed in events 
by falsification. 

One cannot fight alienation by means of 
alienated forms. The sabotage of this world starts 
with the break with the roles the system imposes 
on us, the sabotage of our death in life and the 
refusal of the roles that they have allotted and 
appointed to us. To speak of the Revolution in 
these times is "to have a corpse in one's mouth". 
We only need to look around ourselves to see a 
scenario that constantly reminds us of the defeat. 
Sabotage is thus an action that serves as a 
propellant against the unreality that oppresses 
us. A practice that has not gone unnoticed by 
ideological recuperation, which has transformed 
it into "terrorism" (the professionalization of 
sabotage that has done no more than reinforce 
the system, due to its centralist, hierarchical and 
militarist character). Today, what is proposed is 

not the creation of an armed organization of this 
type, but widespread attack by small affinity 
groups, uncontrollable by any higher 
organization, that come together and dissolve 
like the lunar tides. The tides that are born of the 
awareness of how bad things are and of the 
worsening that awaits us due to events. 

In the 19 th century, such a practice existed that 
put the incipient capitalism in check. Beyond the 
Luddite attacks, the "proletarian rounds" 
rendered their repression and recuperation, in 
which the embryonic unions would play a role, 
almost impossible due to their lack of a rigid 
structure and their maximum flexibility in 
attacks. A group of people came together, struck 
and disappeared into the mass, while a new 
group came together within it. Such widespread 
sabotage makes it difficult for the enemy to 
organize repression. Thus it transforms the 
attack into a universe of pleasure for the 
enlightened hooligan, the feelings of which are 
impossible to describe or communicate with the 
poor and banal language of words. 

The game of subversion, the rules of which are 
written by those that participate in it, becomes an 
effective weapon against capitalism in all its 

There is much more to destroy than to build. 

Our epoch does not need to write poetic slogans, but 

to realize them. 
— Situationist International 

It has been demonstrated that small groups 
that attack do more damage than large 
organizations that specialize in armed struggle. 
The Angry Brigade continued its actions when 
people were arrested and the English state 
assumed the movement had fallen apart. The 
Kale Borroka (street struggle) in Euskadi, which 
Jarrai (the youth organization of the Basque 
nationalist left, NDRO recently declared 
uncontrollable is another example. Power has 
difficulty repressing and eliminating little groups 
that with complete security do not know each 
other, and the only thing that unites them is the 
desire for the destruction of a system that 

prevents them from living and condemns them communication, smashing the apathy and 

to survival and uncertainty. They don't attempt impotence of the eternal revolutionist 

exhibitionist actions in order to make monologue. Relationships and the possibility of 

propaganda as some acronym or mark of origin, contact with other people in the refusal of the 

In the case of the Asturias, sabotage was a class spectacular role, these are transient situations 

weapon used innumerable times, particularly in that in their preparation and development carry 

labor conflicts with these enterprises: Duro in their essence the qualities of the revolutionary 

Felguera, Hunosa, Naval and Ciata...(Asturian situation that will not retreat and that will 

businesses and mines where sabotage was suppress the conditions of survival. It does not 

determinant in the struggles going on in the fall into the irremediable alienating 

1990's); every weary person, regardless of her or hierarchization that every specialized armed 

his ideology, uses it. From the clerk who steals group of an authoritarian and militaristic 

office supplies to the worker who damages the character, to which the masses delegate their 

machine to which he is chained, passing through participation in the attack, carries within itself 
the use of plastic explosives like the licensed The quantitative growth of this practice does 

professionals of Duro Felguera. Today, the not come to us from the hands of propagandists 

example is the burning of the ETTs (temporary of the spectacle, but rather by taking a walk 

employment agencies). The practice of sabotage through the scenario of capitalism, and finding in 

remains limited to precise and very localized this drift the burned ATM, the ETTs with 

conflicts, without global perspectives, simply shattered windows, the smiths changing the 

aiming for partial solutions with economic locks of a supermarket. These visions make our 

demands that remain within imposed limits complicit smiles blossom and move us to go out 

where capitalist logic unfolds. The same holds in that very night to play with fire with the aim of 

the case of the ETTs, an attack that goes beyond making the same smiles rise on the faces of 

the temporality of a conflict in one enterprise, but unknown accomplices through the fellowship of 

that does not place wage slavery into question, destruction. The number doesn't matter, but 

Instead it only questions its most extreme form, rather the quality of the acts: sabotage, 

not aiming at putting an end to exploitation, but expropriation, self-reduction... they return part 

rather to the ETTs. Today the conflict is global of the life that is denied us back to us, but we 

and it is not resolved through partial struggles, want it all. 

but through total struggle and through the Comrades, the game is yours and we take 

refusal of this society as a whole. It is necessary courage in its daily practice. Organize it 

to put an end to the reduction of our lives to yourselves with your accomplices, 
commodities and to wage labor that wears us Against the old world in all its expressions, in 

out, not just to ETTs. We must put an end to class order to leave pre-history let's launch and 

society and not just fascism. Misdirecting our multiply attacks, 
attention toward partial objectives only benefits 

the managers of our misery and those who will FOR THE ABOLITION 

one day lay claim to its management., and both OF CLASS SOCIETY 

are among the targets for sabotage. AGAINST THE MARKET 

The widespread practice of sabotage AGAINST WAGE LABOR! 

(unhindered autonomy, maximum flexibility, 
self-organization, minimum risk) among like- 
minded individuals, opens the possibility for real 
communication, destroying spectacular J M. \3i\mu ^ AJ\U rl.Mm.ii 


A decade to track down technicians to disable warheads 

and deactivate nuclear power plants; 

A generation to replace grocery stores with gardens and 

cough syrup with elderberry and licorice root; 

A century for dairy cows and toy poodles to go feral 

Five hundred year to melt down cannons into wine 

goblets, water pipes and sleigh bells 

A millenium for the dandelions growing out of 

sidewalks to become redwoods. 


excerpts from 


Wolfi Landstreicher 


Submission to domination is enforced not solely, nor even 
most significantly through blatant repression, but rather 
through subtle manipulations worked into the fabric of 
everyday social relationships. These manipulations — 
ingrained in the social fabric not because domination is 
everywhere and nowhere, but because the institutions of 
domination create rules, laws, mores and customs that 
enforce such manipulations — create a logic of submission, 
an often unconscious tendency to justify resignation and 
subservience in one's everyday relations in the world. For 
this reason, it is necessary for those who are serious about 
developing an anarchist insurrectional project to confront 
this tendency wherever it appears — in their lives, their 
relationships and the ideas and practices of the struggles in 
which they participate. Such a confrontation is not a matter 
of therapy, which itself partakes of the logic of submission, 
but of defiant refusal. It requires a subversion of the 
existent, a development of different ways of relating to 
ourselves, each other, the world and our struggles, ways 
that clear reflect our determination to refuse all domination 
and to reappropriate our lives here and now. I am talking 
here of a real revolution of everyday life as the necessary 
basis for a social revolution against this civilization 
founded on domination and exploitation. The following 
essays appeared in Willful Disobedience as the series 
"Against the Logic of Submission". By no means do they 
exhaust the question, but I think they provide a basis for 
discussion as to how we can create ourselves, our 
relationships and our struggle as our own in defiance of all 

Against the Logic of Submission 

A distinguishing factor of the anarchist idea of revolution 
is the importance of the individual in bringing this about. 
Although collectivist ideology has dulled this realization 

even in most anarchist circles, it still manifests in such 
choices as abstention from voting and military service. But 
for those seeking to develop an insurrectional practice, this 
realization needs to go much further than a few abstentions. 
No revolutionary anarchist denies the necessity of a large- 
scale uprising of the exploited to destroy the state, capital 
and every institution of power and privilege. But revolution 
is not a gift that falls from the sky or is granted by an 
abstract History. Actions of individuals help to build the 
circumstance which can make uprisings occur and can push 
them in the direction of generalized revolt. 

This means that rather than waiting around for the 
revolution like certain marxists, trying to read historical 
signs so that one will be ready, it makes more sense that we 
anarchists consider ourselves to be in revolt at every 
moment of our lives and attack this social order without 
worrying about whether "the time is ripe". Individual acts 
of revolt which are easily repeated and imitated provide the 
basis for the development of forms of mass action in which 
the individual is not lost and delegation is absent — that is 
to say insurrectionary action that could destroy the present 
reality and open the possibility for creating a world in 
which every individual is able grasp all that they need to 
fully realize themselves. 

But equally important is the anarchist recognition of the 
primacy of the actual, living individual (as opposed to the 
collectivized cog and to the abstract concept of the 
individual) is the recognition that we need to become a 
certain sort of being, a being capable of acting on our own 
terms to realize our own desires and dreams in the face of 
the most fierce and powerful enemy: this entire civilization 
— the state, capital, the technological system... 

To live as a rebel, as a self-willed anarchist revolutionary, 
requires a great deal of will, determination and spirit in the 
face of dizzying odds. Thus, one essential aspect of 
developing an insurrectional practice is the transformation 
of oneself into such a spirited, willful being. Such a 
transformation does not take place through therapy but 
through attacking the social order both in its manifestations 
in the world and in oneself and one's relationships. An 
uncompromising cruelty may prove essential to this task, 
because there are so many chains to be broken, so many 
limits to be destroyed. As one comrade has said, the 
individual quest is "the appropriation of everything that 
has been subtracted from him through family, school, 
institutions, roles, in order to find his specificity, totality, 
universality, lost... in the process of domestication and the 
construction of symbolic culture." So the point is to make 
the decision to take one's life back in its totality, a decision 
that requires just the sort of ferocity that will be necessary 
to demolish this society. And such a decision will transform 
all one's relationships, demanding a clarity that will leave 
no room for submission to the demands of social protocol, 
disrespectful tolerance or pity for those who fear the energy 
of unchanneled desire more than its suppression. In making 
this decision (and the decision is only truly made as one 

acts to realize it), one is completely rejecting the logic of 
submission that dominates most relationships. 

A Projectual Life 

An understanding of how the decision to live in revolt 
against the present reality relates to desire, relationships, 
love and friendship requires an understanding of how such 
a decision transforms those who make it. The logic of 
submission — the logic that the social order seeks to impose 
on the exploited — is a logic of passivity, of resignation to 
the mediocre existence offered by this order. According to 
this logic, life is something that happens to us, that we 
simply "make the best of", a perspective that defeats us 
before we've begun to struggle. 

But some of us burn with an energy that goads us 
towards something else, something different. In our 
burning we suffer anguish from every humiliation that the 
present world imposes on us. We cannot resign, accept our 
place and content ourselves with just getting by. Moved to 
decisive action by our passion, against all the odds we come 
to view life differently — or more precisely, to live 

A social reality exists. It is smothering the planet with 
commodities and control, imposing a pathetic and 
miserable existence of enslavement to authority and the 
market everywhere. Starting from a refusal of this imposed 
existence, a decision to rise up against it, we are faced with 
the necessity of creating our lives as our own, of projecting 
them. We are posing ourselves a most difficult task: the 
transformation of ourselves, of our relationships and of 
existence itself. These transformations are not separate; they 
constitute a single task — a life projectuality that aims 
toward the destruction of the social order — that is to say 
an insurrectional anarchist projectuality. 

At present, so many of us are so careful, so apologetic, 
ready to distance ourselves from even our most radical and 
defiant acts. This indicates that we have not yet understood 
what it means to live our lives projectually. Our actions are 
still tentative, not full of ourselves, but stepped into lightly 
with a readiness to withdraw at the least sign risk or 
danger. Contrarily, the development of an anarchist 
projectuality requires that one immerse oneself into what 
one does without holding back, without hedging one's bets. 
Not that this immersion is ever a finished project. It is a 
thing in motion, a tension that must be perpetually lived, 
perpetually grappled with. But it has been proven over and 
over and over again that hedging one's bets as surely brings 
defeat as surrender. Having taken this responsibility for our 
lives, there is no room for half measures. The point is to live 
without measure. Longer chains are chains nonetheless. 

One reads in Nietzsche of amor fati. The very opposite of 
the fatal resignation demanded by the logic of 
submission,amor fati is that love of fate as a worthy 
adversary that moves one to courageous action. It springs 
from the willful self-confidence that develops in those who 
put all of their substance into what they do, say or feel. 

Here regrets melt away as one learns to act as one wills; 
mistakes, failures and defeats are not devastations, but 
situations from which to learn and move on in the 
perpetual tension toward the destruction of all limits. 

In society's eyes, any refusal of its order is a crime, but 
this immersion into life moves insurgence beyond the level 
of crime. At this point, the insurgent has ceased to merely 
react to the codes, rules and laws of society and has come to 
determine her actions on his own terms without regard for 
the social order. Beyond tolerance and everyday politeness, 
finished with tact and diplomacy, She is not given to 
speaking abstractly about anything that relates to his life 
and interactions, but rather gives weight to every word. 
This comes from a refusal to skim the surface of things, a 
desire rather to immerse oneself into the projects and 
relations one has chooses to create or involve oneself in, to 
draw them fully into oneself, because these are the things 
with which one creates one's life. 

Like revolution, love, friendship and the wide variety of 
other possible relationships are not events one waits for, 
things that merely happen. When one recognizes herself as 
having agency, as being an individual capable of acting and 
creating, these cease to be wishes, ghostly longings aching 
in the depth of one's gut; they become possibilities toward 
which one moves consciously, projectually, with one's will. 
That burning energy that goads one to revolt is desire — 
desire that has broken free from the channel that reduced it 
to mere longing. This same desire that moves one to create 
her life as a projectuality toward insurrection, anarchy, 
freedom and joy also provokes the realization that such a 
projectuality is best built on shared projects. Liberated 
desire is an expansive energy — an opening of possibilities 
— and wants to share projects and actions, joys and 
pleasures, love and revolt. An insurrection of one may 
indeed be possible. I would even argue that it is the 
necessary first step toward a shared insurrectional project. 
But an insurrection of two, three, many increases courage 
and enjoyment and opens a myriad of passional 

Obviously, the various modes of relating that this society 
puts into place for us to fall into cannot fulfill this desire. 
Tepid "love" partnerships, "friendships" based on the 
camaraderie of mutual humiliation and disrespectful 
tolerance and the daily encounters of no substance that 
maintain the banality of survival — these are all based on 
the logic of submission, on merely accepting the mediocrity 
this reality we must destroy offers. They have nothing to do 
with projectual desire for the other. 

The relations that the decision to live projectually as a 
revolutionary and an anarchist moves one to seek are 
relations of affinity, of passion, of intensity, varieties of 
living relations that help one to build life as desire moves 
her. They are relations with clearly defined others who have 
affinity with one's way of living and being. Such relations 
must be created in a fluid and vital way as dynamic, 
changeable and expansive as affinity and passion 

themselves are. Such an expansive opening of possibilities 
has no place within the logic of submission, and that in 
itself makes it a worthy project for anarchists to pursue. 

Free Love 

Because revolutionary anarchists of all types have 
recognized the freedom of every individual to determine 
how they will live on their own terms to be a central aim of 
anti-authoritarian revolution, we have spoken more often 
and with more courage of the transformation of personal 
life that must be part of any real revolution. Thus, questions 
of love and erotic desire have been openly discussed in 
anarchist circles from very early on. Anarchists were among 
the first advocates of free love recognizing in marriage and 
the absurd sexual restrictions imposed by religious 
morality ways in which submission to authority was 
imposed. Women such as Emma Goldman and Voltairine 
de Cleyre recognized in puritanical morality one of the 
greatest enemies to the liberation of women in particular as 
well as humanity in general. 

But the free love advocated by anarchists should not be 
confused with the tawdry hedonism advocated by Playboy 
and other promoters of commodified sexual liberation. This 
latter is merely a reaction to Puritanism from within the 
present social context. Its continued adherence to the logic 
of submission is evident in its commodification and 
objectification of sex, its dismissive attitude toward 
passionate love — because it can't be quantified and priced 
— and its tendency to judge people based on sexual 
willingness, performance and conquest. Love and erotic 
desire freed from the logic of submission clearly lies 

The struggle against the logic of submission begins with 
the struggle of individuals to create the lives and relations 
they desire. In this context, free love means precisely the 
freedom of each individual's erotic desires from the social 
and moral restrictions that channel them into a few specific 
forms useful to society so that each may create the way she 
loves as he sees fit in relation to those she may love. Such a 
liberation opens the way for an apparently infinite variety 
of possible loving and erotic relations. Most people would 
only want to explore a few of these, but the point of such 
liberation is not that one must explore as many forms of 
erotic desire as possible, but that one has the possibility to 
really choose and create ways of loving that bring him joy, 
that expand her life and goad him to an ever increasing 
intensity of living and of revolt. 

One of the most significant obstacles presently facing us 
in this area is pity for weakness and neurosis. There are 
individuals who know clearly what they desire in each 
potential loving encounter, people who can act and respond 
with a projectual clarity that only those who have made 
their passions and desires their own can have. But when 
these individuals act on their desires, if another who is less 
sure of themselves is unnerved or has their feelings hurt, 
they are expected to change their behavior to accommodate 

the weakness of this other person. Thus the strong-willed 
individual who has grasped the substance of free love and 
begun to live it often finds herself suppressed or ostracized 
by his own supposed comrades. If our aims are indeed 
liberation and the destruction of the logic of submission in 
all areas of life, then we cannot give in to this. The point is 
to transform ourselves into strong, daring, self-willed, 
passionate rebels-and, thus, also into strong, daring, self- 
willed, passionate lovers-and this requires acting without 
guilt, regret or pity. This self-transformation is an essential 
aspect of the revolutionary transformation of the world , 
and we cannot let it get side-tracked by a pity that degrades 
both the one who pities and the one who is pitied. 
Compassion-that feeling with another because one 
recognizes one's own condition in theirs-can be a beautiful 
and revolutionary feeling, but pity-which looks down at 
another's misery and offers charity and self-sacrifice, is 
worthless for creating a world of strong individuals who 
can live and love as they choose. 

But an even greater impediment to a real practice of free 
love and the open exploration of the varieties of possible 
relationships is that most people (even most anarchists) 
have so little greed for, and therefore so little generosity 
with, passion, intensity of feeling, love, joy, hatred, anguish 
— all the flaming pangs of real living. To truly allow the 
expansiveness of passionate intensity to flower and to 
pursue it where the twisting vine of desire takes it — this 
exploration requires will, strength and courage... but mainly 
it requires breaking out of the economic view of passions 
and emotions. It is only in the realm of economy — of 
goods for sale — that greed and generosity contradict each 
other. In the realm of uncommodified feelings, passions, 
desires, ideas, thoughts and dreams, greed and generosity 
go hand-in-hand. The more one wants of these things, the 
more expansive one must be in sharing them. The more 
generous one is with them, the more one will have. It is the 
nature of these things to be expansive, to seek to broaden 
all horizons, to take more and more of reality into 
themselves and transform it. 

But this expansiveness is not indiscriminate. Love and 
erotic desire can manifest expansively in many different 
ways, and individuals choose the ways and the individuals 
with whom they wish to explore them. It makes no sense, 
however, to make these decisions based on an imagined 
dearth of something that is, in fact, potentially beyond 
measure. Rather such decisions are best based on desire for 
those to whom one chooses to relate and the potential one 
perceives in them to make the fires of passion burn ever 
more brightly. 

The mechanics of erotic desire — homosexuality, 
heterosexuality bisexuality, monogamy, non-monogamy 
etc. — are not the substance of free love. It can manifest in 
all of these forms and more. Its substance is found in those 
who choose to expand themselves, to goad themselves to 
expand their passions, dreams desires and thoughts. Free 
love, like revolution, acts to recreate reality in its own 

image, the image of a great and dangerous Utopia. Thus it 
seeks to turn reality on its head. This is no easy path. It has 
no place for our weaknesses, no time for neurotic self-pity 
or meagerness. For love in its most impassioned and 
unconstrained forms is as cruel as revolution. How could it 
be otherwise when its goal is the same: the transformation 
of every aspect of life and the destruction of all that 
prevents it? 

Passionate Friendship 

We live in a world in which the majority of encounters 
and interactions involve work and commodity exchange. In 
other words, the dominant forms of relating are economic, 
based on the domination of survival over life. In such a 
world, it is no surprise that the concept of friendship no 
longer has much value. Today, neither the daily interactions 
of one's "communities" (these strange, disconnected 
"communities" of family, school, work) nor the chance 
encounters (at the market, on the bus, at some public event) 
have much chance of sparking a real and intense interest in 
another, an impassioned curiosity to discover who they are 
what we might be able to create with them. The common 
thread that runs through these not so varied interactions 
and encounters is that they originate in the operations of 
domination and exploitation, in the social order that 
immiserates our lives an to which most people grudgingly 

The sorts of relationships most likely to spring from such 
a situation are those that reflect the humiliation and social 
impoverishment inherent in it. Based on the necessity to 
escape the isolation of a crowded, but atomized society, a 
generalized "friendliness" that is slightly more than mere 
politeness (since it permits harmless, light mockery and 
safe, substanceless flirtation) develops. On the basis of this 
generalized "friendliness", it is possible to meet some 
individuals with whom to commiserate more closely — 
people with whom to share a beer at the pub, go to football 
games or rock shows or rent a movie... And these are one's 

It really is no wonder then that what is called friendship 
today so often seems to be nothing more than the 
camaraderie of mutual humiliation and disrespectful 
toleration. When all we really have in common is our 
shared exploitation and enslavement to commodity 
consumption and our differences mainly lie in our social 
identities, themselves largely defined by our jobs,, the 
commodities we buy and our uses to those who rule us, 
there is really very little to spark pride, joy, wonder and 
passion in our so-called friendships. If the deep loneliness 
of massified, commodified society draws us to others, what 
little our impoverished beings have to offer each other soon 
leads to resentment. Thus, interactions between friends at 
this time seem to be mostly dominated by comic mockery 
and various forms of one-upmanship. While such forms of 
play may indeed be amusing as part of a strong 
relationship based on real mutual pleasure, when it 

becomes the main way of relating, surely something is 

Some of us refuse to accept the impositions of exploitation 
and domination. We strive to create our own lives and in 
the process of create our live and in the process create 
relationships that escape the logic of submission to 
proletarianization and commodity consumption. By our 
own will, we redefine our commonalities and our 
differences, clarifying them through the alchemy of 
struggle and revolt, basing them on our own passions and 
desires. This makes the form that friendship tends to take in 
this society completely unpalatable: to simply tolerate 
another out of loneliness and call this one friend — how 
pathetic! Starting from that sense of pride that moved us to 
rebel, that point of selfish dignity that will not tolerate 
further humiliation, we seek to build our friendships upon 
the greatness we discover in each other — joy, passion, 
wonder sparked both by what we share in common and by 
how we differ. Why should we expect less of friendship 
than we do of erotic love? Why do we expect so little of 
both? Rebellion sparks fire in the hearts of those who rise 
up, and this fire calls for relationships that burn: loves, 
friendships, and, yes, even hatreds that reflect the intensity 
of rebellion. The greatest insult we can give another human 
being is to merely tolerate them, so let us pursue 
friendships with the same intensity with which we pursue 
love, blurring the boundaries between them, creating our 
own fierce and beautiful ways of relating free of that logic 
of submission to mediocrity imposed by the state and 


Having made the decision to refuse to simply live as this 
society demands, to submit to the existence it imposes on 
us, we have put ourselves into a position of being in 
permanent conflict with the social order. This conflict will 
manifest in many different situations, evoking the intense 
passions of the strong-willed. Just as we demand of our 
loves and our friendships a fullness and intensity that this 
society seeks to suppress, we want to bring all of ourselves 
to our conflicts as well, particularly our conflict with this 
society aimed at its destruction, so that we struggle with all 
the strength necessary to accomplishing our aim. It is in this 
light, as anarchists, that we would best understand the 
place of hatred. 

The present social order seeks to rationalize everything. It 
finds passion dangerous and destructive since such 
intensity of feeling is, after all, opposed to the cold logic of 
power and profit. There is no place in this society for 
passionate reason or the reasonable focusing of passion. 
When the efficient functioning of the machine is the highest 
social value, both passion and living, human reason are 
detrimental to society. Cold rationality based on a 
mechanistic view of reality is necessary for upholding such 
a value. 

In this light, the campaigns against "hate" promoted not 

only by every progressive and reformist, but also by the 
institutions of power which are the basis of the social 
inequalities (when I refer to equality and inequality in this 
article, I am not referring to "equality of rights" which is a 
legal abstraction, but to the concrete differences in access to 
that which is necessary in order to determine the conditions 
of one's life) that incorporate bigotry into the very structure 
of this society, make sense on several levels. By focusing the 
attempts to battle bigotry onto the passions of individuals, 
the structures of domination blind many well-meaning 
people to the bigotry that has been built into the institutions 
of this society, that is a necessary aspect of its method of 
exploitation. Thus, the method for fighting bigotry takes a 
two-fold path: trying to change the hearts of racist, sexist 
and homophobic individuals and promoting legislation 
against an undesirable passion. Not only is the necessity for 
a revolution to destroy a social order founded on 
institutional bigotry and structural inequality forgotten; the 
state and the various institutions through which it exercises 
power are strengthened so that the can suppress "hate". 
Furthermore, though bigotry in a rationalized form is 
useful to the efficient functioning of the social machine, an 
individual passion of too much intensity, even when 
tunneled into the channels of bigotry, presents a threat to 
the efficient functioning of the social order. It is 
unpredictable, a potential point for the breakdown of 
control. Thus, it must necessarily be suppressed and only 
permitted to express itself in the channels that have been 
carefully constructed by the rulers of this society. But one of 
the aspects of this emphasis on "hate" — an individual 
passion — rather than on institutional inequalities that is 
most useful to the state is that it permits those in power — 
and their media lapdogs — to equate the irrational and 
bigoted hatred of white supremacists and gay-bashers with 
the reasonable hatred that the exploited who have risen in 
revolt feel for the masters of this society and their lackeys. 
Thus, the suppression of hatred serves the interest of social 
control and upholds the institutions of power and, hence, 
the institutional inequality necessary to its functioning. 

Those of us who desire the destruction of power, the end 
of exploitation and domination, cannot let ourselves 
succumb to the rationalizations of the progressives, which 
only serve the interests of the rulers of the present. Having 
chosen to refuse our exploitation and domination, to take 
our lives as our own in struggle against the miserable 
reality that has been imposed on us, we inevitably confront 
an array of individuals, institutions and structures that 
stand in our way, actively opposing us — the state, capital, 
the rulers of this order and their loyal guard dogs, the 
various systems and institutions of control and exploitation. 
These are our enemies and it is only reasonable that we 
would hate them. It is the hatred of the slave for the master 
— or, more accurately, the hatred of the escaped slave for 
the laws, the cops, the "good citizens", the courts and the 
institutions that seek to hunt her down and return him to 
the master. And as with the passions of our loves and 

friendships, this passionate hatred is also to be cultivated 
and made our own, its energy focused and directed into the 
development of our projects of revolt and destruction. 

Desiring to be the creators of our own lives and relations, 
to live in a world in which all that imprisons our desires 
and suppresses our dreams has disappeared, we have an 
immense task before us: the destruction of the present 
social order. Hatred of the enemy — of the ruling order and 
all who willfully uphold it — is a tempestuous passion that 
can provide an energy for this task that we would do well 
to embrace. Anarchist insurrectionaries have a way of 
viewing life and a revolutionary project through which to 
focus this energy, so as to aim it with intelligence and 
strength. The logic of submission demands the suppression 
of all passions and their channeling into sentimentalized 
consumerism or rationalized ideologies of bigotry. The 
intelligence of revolt embraces all passions, finding in them 
not only mighty weapons for the battle against this order, 
but also the wonder and joy of a life lived to the full. 


"Be realistic: Demand the Impossible!" This famous 
slogan, which graced the walls of Paris in May 1968, was 
truly revolutionary in its time, turning every common sense 
conception of realism on its head. Now artificial, virtual 
"realities" have come to dominate social relations. Life is 
not so much lived as watched, and anything can be seen 
with the new technologies. Considering this, it is no 
surprise that a slogan once so challenging to an entire social 
order has now become an advertising slogan. In the realm 
of the virtual, everything is possible for a price. Everything, 
that is, except a world without prices, a world of actual, 
self-determined, face-to face relationships in which one 
chooses one's activities for oneself and concretely acts upon 
reality within the world. 

The circuses that we are offered with our bread present 
us with spectacles like none ever seen before. Exotic places, 
strange creatures with magical powers, fantastic explosions, 
battles and miracles, all these are offered for our 
entertainment, keeping us glued to the spectator's seat, our 
activity limited to occasionally flicking a button — not 
unlike the primary activity in increasing numbers of jobs. 
So "the impossible" this society offers us is nothing more 
than spectacular special effects on a screen, the drug of 
virtuality numbing us to the misery of the reality that 
surrounds us, in which possibilities for really living are 
closing down. 

If we are to escape this miserable existence, our revolt 
must be precisely against social reality in its totality. 
Realism within this context becomes acceptance. Today 
when one speaks sincerely of revolution — of striving to 
overturn the present reality in order to open the possibility 
of concrete, self-determined human activity and individual 
freedom — one is being unrealistic, even Utopian. But can 
anything less put an end to the present misery? 

Increasingly, in the face of the juggernaut that is 

civilization, our present social reality, I hear many radicals 
say, "It's necessary to be realistic; I'll just do what I can in 
my own life." This is not the declaration of a strong 
individuality making itself the center of a revolt against the 
world of domination and alienation, but rather an 
admission of resignation, a retreat into merely tending one's 
own garden as the monster lumbers on. The "positive" 
projects developed in the name of this sort of realism are 
nothing more than alternative ways of surviving within the 
present society. They not only fail to threaten the world of 
capital and the state; they actually ease the pressure on 
those in power by providing voluntary social services 
under the guise of creating "counter-institutions". Using 
the present reality as the place from which they view the 
world, those who cannot help but see the revolutionary 
destruction of this reality in which we live as impossible 
and, therefore, a dangerous goal, so they resign themselves 
to maintaining an alternative within the present reality. 

A more activist form of realism also exists. It is found in 
a perspective that ignores the totality of the present reality, 
choosing instead to see only its parts. Thus, the reality of 
alienation, domination and exploitation is broken down 
into categories of oppression which are viewed separately 
such as racism, sexism, environmental destruction and so 
on. Although such categorization can indeed be useful for 
understanding the specifics of how the present social order 
functions, it usually tends instead to keep people from 
observing the whole, allowing the leftist project of 
developing specializations in specific forms of oppression 
to move forward, developing ideological methods for 
explaining these oppressions. This ideological approach 
separates theory from practise leading to a further 
breakdown into issues upon which to act: equal wages for 
women, acceptance of gays into the military or the Boy 
Scouts, protection of a particular wetlands or patch of 
forest, on and on goes the endless round of demands. Once 
things are broken down to this level, where any analysis of 
this society as a whole has disappeared, one is once again 
viewing things from a place within the present reality. For 
the activist realist, also known as the leftist, efficacy is the 
primary value. Whatever works is good. Thus emphasis is 
placed on litigation, legislation, petition to the authorities, 
negotiation with those who rule us, because these get 
results — at least if the result one wants is merely the 
amelioration of one particular problem or the assimilation 
of a particular group or cause into the present order. But 
such methods are not effective at all from a revolutionary 
anarchist perspective, because they are grounded in 
acceptance of the present reality, in the perspective that this 
is what is and so we must use it. And that is the perspective 
of the logic of submission. A reversal of perspective is 
necessary to free ourselves from this logic. 

Such a reversal of perspective requires finding a different 
place from which to perceive the world, a different position 
from which to act. Rather than starting from the world as it 
is, one may choose to start from the will to grasp her life as 

his own. This decision immediately places one into conflict 
with the present reality, because here the conditions of 
existence and, thus, the choices of how one can live have 
already been determined by the ruling order. This has come 
about because a few people manage to take control of the 
conditions of everybody's existence — precisely, in 
exchange for bread and circuses, survival graced with a bit 
of entertainment. Thus, individual revolt needs to arm itself 
with an analysis of class that expands its critique, 
awakening a revolutionary perspective. When one also 
begins to understand the institutional and technological 
means through which the ruling class maintains, enforces 
and expands this control, this perspective takes on a social 
and luddite dimension. 

The logic of submission tells us to be realistic, to limit 
ourselves to the ever-narrowing possibilities that the 
present reality offers. But when this reality is, in fact, 
marching toward death — toward the permanent eclipse of 
the human spirit and the destruction of the living 
environment — is it truly realistic to "be realistic"? If one 
loves life, if one wants to expand and flourish, it is 
absolutely necessary to free desire from the channels to 
constrain it, to let it flood our minds and hearts with 
passion that sparks the wildest dreams. Then one must 
grasp these dreams and from them hone a weapon with 
which to attack this reality, a passionate rebellious reason 
capable of formulating projects aimed at the destruction of 
that which exists and the realization of our most marvelous 
desires. For those of us who want to make our lives our 
own, anything less would be unrealistic. 

Beyond Feminism, Beyond Gender 

In order to create a revolution that can put an end to all 
domination, it is necessary to put an end to the tendency we 
all have to submit. This requires that we view the roles that 
this society imposes on us with a cruel and penetrating eye 
seeking out their weak points with the aim of breaking 
through their limits and moving beyond them. 

Sexuality is an essential expression of individual desire 
and passion, of the flame that can ignite both love and 
revolt. Thus, it can be an important force of the individual's 
will that can raise her beyond the mass as a unique and 
indomitable being. Gender, on the other hand, is a conduit 
built by the social order to constrain this sexual energy, to 
confine and limit it, directing toward the reproduction of 
this order of domination and submission. Thus, it is an 
obstruction to an attempt to freely determine how one will 
live and relate. Nonetheless, up to now, men have been 
granted more leeway in asserting their will within these 
roles than women, a reasonable explanation for why more 
anarchists, revolutionaries and outlaws have been men than 
women. Women who have been strong, rebellious 
individuals have been so precisely because they have 
moved beyond their femininity. 

It is unfortunate that the women's liberation movement 
that reemerged in the 1960's did not succeed in developing 

a deep analysis of the nature of domination in its totality 
and of the role played by gender in its reproduction. A 
movement that had started from a desire to be free of 
gender roles in order to be full, self-determined individuals 
was transformed into a specialization just like most partial 
struggles of the time. This guaranteed that a total analysis 
would not be possible within this context. 

This specialization is the feminism of the present era that 
began developing out of the women's liberation movement 
in the late '60's. It does not aim so much at the liberation of 
individual women from the limits of their gender roles as at 
the liberation of "woman" as a social category. Within 
mainstream politics, this project consists of gaining rights, 
recognition and protection for woman as a recognized 
social category under the law. In theory, radical feminism 
moves beyond mere legalities with the aim of liberating 
woman as a social category from male domination. Since 
male domination is not adequately explored as an aspect of 
total domination, even by anarcha-feminists, the rhetoric of 
radical feminism frequently takes on a style similar to that 
of national liberation struggles. But in spite of the 
differences in style and rhetoric, the practice of mainstream 
and radical feminism often coincide. This is not by chance. 

The specialization of radical feminism actually lies in the 
cataloguing of wrongs suffered by woman at the hands of 
man. If this catalogue was ever completed, the 
specialization would no longer be necessary and it would 
be time to move beyond this listing of wrongs suffered to 
an actual attempt to analyze the nature of women's 
oppression in this society and take real, thought-out action 
to end it. So the maintenance of this specialization requires 
that feminists expand this catalogue to infinity, even to the 
point of explaining the oppressive actions of women in 
positions of power as expressions of patriarchal power, thus 
freeing these women from responsibility for their actions. 
Any serious analysis of the complex relations of 
domination as it actually exists is laid aside in favor of an 
ideology in which man dominates and woman is the victim 
of this domination. But the creation of one's identity on the 
basis of one's oppression, on the victimization one has 
suffered, does not provide strength or independence. 
Instead it creates a need for protection and security that 
eclipses the desire for freedom and self-determination. In 
the theoretical and psychological realm, an abstract, 
universal "sisterhood" may meet this need, but in order to 
provide a basis for this sisterhood, the "feminine 
mystique", which was exposed in the 1960's as a cultural 
construct supporting male domination, is revived in the 
form of women's spirituality, goddess religion and a variety 
of other feminist ideologies. The attempt to liberate woman 
as a social category reaches its apotheosis in the re-creation 
of the feminine gender role in the name of an elusive 
gender solidarity. The fact that many radical feminists have 
turned to cops, courts and other state programs for 
protection on the practical level (thus imitating mainstream 
feminism) only serves to underline the illusory nature of 

the "sisterhood" they proclaim. Though there have been 
attempts to move beyond these limits within the context of 
feminism, this specialization has been its defining quality 
for three decades. In the forms in which it has been 
practiced, it has failed to present a revolutionary challenge 
to either gender or domination. The anarchist project of 
total liberation calls us to move beyond these limits to the 
point of attacking gender itself with the aim of becoming 
complete beings defined not as a conglomeration of social 
identities, but as unique, whole individuals. 

It is both cliched and mistaken to claim that men and 
women have been equally oppressed by their gender roles. 
The male gender role does allow a greater leeway for the 
assertion of one's will. So just as the liberation of women 
from their gender role is not a matter of becoming more 
masculine but rather of moving beyond their femininity, so 
for men the point is not to be more feminine but to move 
beyond their masculinity. The point is to discover that core 
of uniqueness that is in each of us that is beyond all social 
roles and to make that the point from which we act, live 
and think in the world, in the sexual realm as in all others. 
Gender separates sexuality from the wholeness of our 
being, attaching specific traits to it that serve the 
maintenance of the present social order. Thus sexual energy, 
which could have amazing revolutionary potential, is 
channeled into the reproduction of relations of domination 
and submission, of dependence and desperation. The 
sexual misery that this has produced and its commercial 
exploitation surround us. The inadequacy of calling for 
people to "embrace both their masculinity and femininity" 
lies in the lack of analysis of the extent to which both of 
these concepts are social inventions serving the purposes of 
power. Thus, to change the nature of gender roles, to 
increase their number or modify their form, is useless from 
a revolutionary perspective, being nothing more than 
mechanically adjusting the form of the conduits that 
channel our sexual energy. Instead, we need to 
reappropriate our sexual energy in order to reintegrate into 
the totality of our being in order to become so expansive 
and powerful as to burst every conduit and flood the plain 
of existence with our indomitable being. This is not a 
therapeutic task, but rather one of defiant revolt — one that 
springs from a strong will and a refusal to back down. If 
our desire is to destroy all domination, then it is necessary 
that we move beyond everything that holds us back, 
beyond feminism, yes, and beyond gender, because this is 
where we find the ability to create our indomitable 
individuality that rises up against all domination without 
hesitation. If we wish to destroy the logic of submission, 
this must be our minimum goal. 

Security Culture and Expansive Living 

Life today is far too small. Forced into roles and 
relationships that reproduce the current social order, it 
focuses on the petty, on that which can be measured, priced, 
bought and sold. The meager existence of shopkeepers and 

security guards has been imposed everywhere, and real life, 
expansive life, life with no limits other than our own 
capacities exists only in revolt against this society. So those 
of us who want an expansive existence, life lived to the full, 
are moved to take action, to attack the institutions that 
compel us to live such petty lives. 

Moved to take back our lives and make them wellsprngs 
of the marvelous, we inevitably encounter repression. 
Everyday, hidden mechanisms of repression operate to 
prevent revolt, to guarantee the submission that maintains 
the social order. The necessities of survival, the underlying 
awareness of always being watched, the barrage of 
prohibitions that meet the eyes on signs or in the person of 
a cop, the very structure of the social environments in 
which we move, these are enough to keep most people in 
line, eyes to the ground, minds empty of all except the petty 
worries of the day. But when one has had enough of this 
impoverished existence and decides that there must be 
more, that she cannot tolerate another day in which life is 
diminished even more, the repression ceases to be so subtle. 
The spark of revolt has to be suppressed; the maintenance 
of the social order requires it. 

The expansion of life cannot occur in hiding — that 
would simply be a change of cells within the social prison. 
But because this expansion, this tension toward freedom, 
moves us to attack this social order, to take action that is 
outside and frequently against its written and implied laws, 
we are forced to deal with the question of how to evade the 
uniformed guard dogs of the ruling class. So we cannot 
ignore the question of security. 

I have always considered the question of security a 
simple one, a matter of practical intelligence that anyone 
should be capable of figuring out. By developing relations 
of affinity, on decides with whom one can act. There is no 
need to say a word about an action to anyone who is not 
involved in it. This is basic and should go without saying 
for anyone who decides to action against domination. But 
such practical intelligence has no need to enshroud itself in 
an atmosphere of suspicion and secretiveness where every 
word and every thought must be watched, in which even 
the words of defiance are considered too great a risk. If our 
practice takes us there, we have already lost. 

In the context of illegal activity, security is essential. But 
even in this context, it is not the top priority. Our top 
priority is always the creation of the lives and relationships 
we desire, the opening of the possibility for the fullness of 
existence that the system of domination and exploitation 
cannot allow. Those of us who truly desire such an 
expansive existence want to express it in all of our actions. 
In this light, the call for the development of a "security 
culture" seems strange to me. When I first heard the term, 
my immediate thought was: "That is precisely the sort of 
culture we live in!" The cops and cameras on every corner 
and in every shop, the increasing numbers of identification 
cards and of interactions requiring their use, the various 
weapons systems put in place for national security, and on 

and on — the culture of security surrounds us, and it is the 
same as the culture of repression. Certainly, as anarchists 
this is not what we want. 

Many of the practical suggestions made by the 
proponents of security culture are basic good sense for one 
who is taking action against the institutions of domination. 
It is obvious that one shouldn't leave evidence or speak to 
the police, that one should take the due precautions to 
avoid arrest — a situation that would certainly not enhance 
one's struggle for a full free life. But it makes no sense to 
speak of a security culture. The caution necessary to avoid 
arrest does not reflect the sort of life and relationships we 
want to build. At least I hope not. 

When anarchists begin to see security as their top priority 
— as a "culture" that they must develop — paranoia comes 
to dominate relationships. Anarchist conferences are set up 
with levels of bureaucracy and (let's call things what they 
are) policing that too closely parallels what we are trying to 
destroy. Suspicion replaces comradeship and solidarity. If 
someone doesn't look or dress right, he finds herself 
ostracized, excluded from involvement. Something vital has 
been lost here — the reason for our struggle. It has 
vanished behind the hard armor of militancy, and we have 
come to be the mirror image of our enemy. 

The anarchist struggle slips into this joyless, paranoid 
rigidity when it is not carried out as an attempt to create life 
differently, joyfully, intensely, but is rather treated as a 
cause to which one is to sacrifice oneself. One's struggle 
then becomes moral, not a question of desire, but of right 
and wrong, good and evil, conceived as absolute and 
knowable. Here is the source of much of the rigidity, much 
of the paranoia and much of the unwarranted sense of self- 
importance that one finds much too often in anarchist 
circles. We are the righteous warriors surrounded on all 
sides by the forces of evil. We must protect ourselves from 
any possibility of contamination. And the character armor 
hardens undermining the joyful spirit that provides the 
courage necessary for the destruction of the world of 

This destruction, this demolition of the social prison that 
surrounds us would bring us face-to-face with the 
unknown. If we confront it with fear and suspicion, we will 
build the new prisons ourselves. Some already are, in their 
minds and in their projects. This is why our projects of 
attack must originate in and be carried out with joy and an 
expansive generosity of spirit. The logic of paranoia and 
fear, the logic of suspicion with its measured words and 
deeds, is the logic of submission — if not to the present 
order of domination, then to a morality that diminishes our 
lives and guarantees that we will not have the courage to 
face the unknown, to face the world in which we would 
find ourselves if the present order were destroyed. Instead, 
let's embrace the passionate reason of desire that defies all 
domination. This reason is absolutely serious in its desire to 
destroy all that diminishes life, confining it to that which 
can be measured. And because it is so serious, it laughs. 

Damn the torturers! 

There is No democracy, state or law without misery and torture. They trivialize torture. The things 
that surround a person in a political world require torture to be obtained. 

Effective Subversion is unbearable to the State. All freedom which incites subversion 
exposes gaps. When people are under a dictatorial regime, Subversion is the 

ultimate expression of your health. 

in the democratic system of law, accommodated citizens prefer not to see, 

hear and talk about the daily torture that take place in prisons, police stations, 

streets, slums, well-built homes, schools... 

They want to believe that with the end of the political prisons, torturers remain 

procedural history or files in the memories of ever-living freedom fighters. The torturer is a 
vestige of fascism which sometimes takes the form of a government and, most of the time, is 

disguised in democratic conduct. 

The notion of crime, police, court and criminal breathes 3. hidden Continuity illtO 

the Whole apparatus. The notion supports the need for police, court and all the penal 

apparatus, gears kept in tune by torture. It establishes a vicious circle that everyone 
accepts, finally, in the national and international courts. 

They believe that the punishment they inflict forges universal values of humanity, that the 
correct legal punishment is by torture and, if necessary, through use of the death penalty on behalf of 
the democratic state of law and the good of humanity. 

However, before judging a torturer, or formally condemn their activity, We need to knOW 

their names and print them in the streets, the homes of families, schools 
... learn where are the living, with whom they relate ... 

Torture, as well as punishment, is not a legal institution, but a device of 
power technologies. 

Damn the tormentors! 

Down with state terror and the torturers! 
Let us not forget that democracy was born with terror! 








• 1-1